Ana-Alicia Beltran-Bless, Bader Alshamsan, Jason Jia, Victor Lo, Seth Climans, Garth Nicholas, Terry L Ng
{"title":"同时接受替莫唑胺和放射治疗的胶质瘤患者对肺孢子虫肺炎(PJP)预防措施的看法--患者和医生调查。","authors":"Ana-Alicia Beltran-Bless, Bader Alshamsan, Jason Jia, Victor Lo, Seth Climans, Garth Nicholas, Terry L Ng","doi":"10.1007/s11060-024-04764-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) prophylaxis is required by provincial and national drug monographs during glioma treatment using temozolomide (TMZ) concurrently with radiation (TMZ-RT). However, real-world data suggest the potential benefits of PJP prophylaxis may not outweigh its potential harms in this population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a single-center patient survey and a national physician survey to explore the role of PJP prophylaxis amongst glioma patients undergoing TMZ-RT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>23% (31/133) of physicians and 60% (44/73) of patients completed a survey. The median patient age was 42 (range 20-77); 85% (34/40) had completed adjuvant TMZ. Although only 2.4% (1/41) of patients received PJP prophylaxis, only one person (without PJP prophylaxis) was hospitalized for pneumonia. When presented with hypothetical PJP risks, 13.2% (5/38) of patients were concerned about PJP infection, while 26% (10/38) were concerned about potential side effects from prophylactic antibiotics. Most physicians (77%, 17/22) perceived the evidence for PJP prophylaxis as weak; 58% (11/19) did not routinely prescribe prophylaxis, and 73% (16/22) felt that PJP prophylaxis should be limited to patients with additional risk factors. Over 95% of physicians estimated that the incidence of PJP was < 1% in their last 5 years of practice regardless of PJP prophylaxis. For 73% (16/22) of physicians, to prescribe PJP prophylaxis, the risk of PJP infection needed to be 3-8%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current recommendation to routinely prescribe PJP prophylaxis in patients receiving TMZ-RT in the absence of other risk factors warrants reconsideration.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perception of pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) prophylaxis in glioma patients receiving concurrent temozolomide and radiation- a patient and physician survey.\",\"authors\":\"Ana-Alicia Beltran-Bless, Bader Alshamsan, Jason Jia, Victor Lo, Seth Climans, Garth Nicholas, Terry L Ng\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11060-024-04764-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) prophylaxis is required by provincial and national drug monographs during glioma treatment using temozolomide (TMZ) concurrently with radiation (TMZ-RT). However, real-world data suggest the potential benefits of PJP prophylaxis may not outweigh its potential harms in this population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a single-center patient survey and a national physician survey to explore the role of PJP prophylaxis amongst glioma patients undergoing TMZ-RT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>23% (31/133) of physicians and 60% (44/73) of patients completed a survey. The median patient age was 42 (range 20-77); 85% (34/40) had completed adjuvant TMZ. Although only 2.4% (1/41) of patients received PJP prophylaxis, only one person (without PJP prophylaxis) was hospitalized for pneumonia. When presented with hypothetical PJP risks, 13.2% (5/38) of patients were concerned about PJP infection, while 26% (10/38) were concerned about potential side effects from prophylactic antibiotics. Most physicians (77%, 17/22) perceived the evidence for PJP prophylaxis as weak; 58% (11/19) did not routinely prescribe prophylaxis, and 73% (16/22) felt that PJP prophylaxis should be limited to patients with additional risk factors. Over 95% of physicians estimated that the incidence of PJP was < 1% in their last 5 years of practice regardless of PJP prophylaxis. For 73% (16/22) of physicians, to prescribe PJP prophylaxis, the risk of PJP infection needed to be 3-8%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current recommendation to routinely prescribe PJP prophylaxis in patients receiving TMZ-RT in the absence of other risk factors warrants reconsideration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-024-04764-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-024-04764-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
Perception of pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) prophylaxis in glioma patients receiving concurrent temozolomide and radiation- a patient and physician survey.
Purpose: Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) prophylaxis is required by provincial and national drug monographs during glioma treatment using temozolomide (TMZ) concurrently with radiation (TMZ-RT). However, real-world data suggest the potential benefits of PJP prophylaxis may not outweigh its potential harms in this population.
Methods: We conducted a single-center patient survey and a national physician survey to explore the role of PJP prophylaxis amongst glioma patients undergoing TMZ-RT.
Results: 23% (31/133) of physicians and 60% (44/73) of patients completed a survey. The median patient age was 42 (range 20-77); 85% (34/40) had completed adjuvant TMZ. Although only 2.4% (1/41) of patients received PJP prophylaxis, only one person (without PJP prophylaxis) was hospitalized for pneumonia. When presented with hypothetical PJP risks, 13.2% (5/38) of patients were concerned about PJP infection, while 26% (10/38) were concerned about potential side effects from prophylactic antibiotics. Most physicians (77%, 17/22) perceived the evidence for PJP prophylaxis as weak; 58% (11/19) did not routinely prescribe prophylaxis, and 73% (16/22) felt that PJP prophylaxis should be limited to patients with additional risk factors. Over 95% of physicians estimated that the incidence of PJP was < 1% in their last 5 years of practice regardless of PJP prophylaxis. For 73% (16/22) of physicians, to prescribe PJP prophylaxis, the risk of PJP infection needed to be 3-8%.
Conclusion: The current recommendation to routinely prescribe PJP prophylaxis in patients receiving TMZ-RT in the absence of other risk factors warrants reconsideration.