Occupational exposure of pharmacy technicians and cleaning staff to cytotoxic drugs in Dutch hospitals

Safe handling of cytostatic drugs: recommendations from independent science

OBJECTIVES

Due to their mechanism of action, most classical cytostatic drugs have carcinogenic, mutagenic and/or reprotoxic properties. Therefore, occupational exposure of healthcare staff to these drugs should be prevented. Our objective was to lay out European legislation on this topic and reflect on the process of revising the European CM-directive. We summarise independent European and Dutch studies, and give a concise set of basic recommendations for safe working with cytotoxic drugs in healthcare facilities.

METHODS

We were directly involved in the process of revising the CM-directive: first, through an EU commissioned workshop in the Netherlands, and after that by contributing to the pan-European stakeholder symposium. For this aim, we had to gather the relevant study data from the Netherlands and from Europe. We analysed all relevant industry-independent studies and collated a set of basic recommendations.

RESULTS

Independent studies show that the development of measures in recent years can lead to a safe work environment. Standardising the cleaning process leads to a significant improvement in environmental contamination in the majority of hospitals. In the Netherlands, exposure of workers was shown to be well beneath the limit value of 0.74 µg cyclophosphamide per week, therefore showing that the measures taken in recent years are adequate.

CONCLUSIONS

The safety of healthcare workers is of the utmost importance. Current practice in the Netherlands show that measures taken in recent years are adequate. European legislation should be based on independent scientific research and practice. The first goal should be to bring countries with less safe working levels to a higher level instead of introducing measures that only increase healthcare budgets but not healthcare safety.

Occupational exposure to chemical substances and health outcomes among hospital environmental services workers: A scoping review of international studies

Environmental services (EVS) workers are essential to preventing the spread of disease in hospitals. However, their exposure to hazardous chemicals and drugs is understudied. This scoping review will synthesize literature on hazardous chemical exposures and adverse health outcomes among EVS workers to identify research gaps and trends for further investigation. The scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to ensure complete and accurate reporting. The scoping review included 25 studies on occupational exposure to chemicals among EVS workers in hospitals. Most studies focused on exposure to cleaning products, which led to dermal, respiratory, and ocular symptoms, oxidative stress, and inflammation. While personal protective equipment (PPE), training, education, and policies have the potential to enhance safety, further research is required to examine the long-term impacts of exposure and the cost-effectiveness of interventions. Future studies should utilize longitudinal approaches and self-reported data collection methods, such as diaries and interviews, to comprehensively assess exposure risks and develop effective interventions and policies. Future research is needed to understand the potential health risks faced by EVS workers from exposure to chemicals in hospitals. Longitudinal studies with objective exposure assessments and larger sample sizes should be conducted. Policies and interventions must be developed and implemented to improve safe work practices and reduce negative health outcomes.

Systematic review of genotoxicity induced by occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs

With increasing numbers of cancer cases, the use of antineoplastic agents is expected to rise. This will be accompanied by an increase in occupational exposure, which can cause unwanted health effects in workers. Our aim was to give an overview of genotoxic and epigenetic effects after occupational exposure to antineoplastic agents and to assess the concentration-effect relation. Four databases were searched for papers investigating genotoxic and/or epigenetic effects of occupational exposure to antineoplastic agents. Out of the 245 retrieved papers, 62 were included in this review. In this systematic literature review, we confirmed that exposure of healthcare workers to antineoplastic agents can lead to genotoxic damage. However, we observed a lack of data on exposure as well as genotoxic and epigenetic effects in workers other than healthcare workers. Furthermore, gaps in the current knowledge regarding the potential epigenetic effects caused by antineoplastic drug exposure and regarding the link between internal antineoplastic drug concentration and genotoxic and epigenetic effects after occupational exposure to antineoplastic agents were identified, offering a first step for future research.

Evaluation of long-term data on surface contamination by antineoplastic drugs in pharmacies

PURPOSE

The handling of antineoplastic drugs represents an occupational health risk for employees in pharmacies. To minimize exposure and to evaluate cleaning efficacy, wipe sampling was used to analyze antineoplastic drugs on surfaces. In 2009, guidance values were suggested to facilitate the interpretation of results, leading to a decrease in surface contamination. The goal of this follow-up was to evaluate the time trend of surface contamination, to identify critical antineoplastic drugs and sampling locations and to reassess guidance values.

METHODS

Platinum, 5-fluorouracil, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, gemcitabine, methotrexate, docetaxel and paclitaxel were analyzed in more than 17,000 wipe samples from 2000 to 2021. Statistical analysis was performed to describe and interpret the data.

RESULTS

Surface contaminations were generally relatively low. The median concentration for most antineoplastic drugs was below the limit of detection except for platinum (0.3 pg/cm²). Only platinum and 5-fluorouracil showed decreasing levels over time. Most exceedances of guidance values were observed for platinum (26.9%), cyclophosphamide (18.5%) and gemcitabine (16.6%). The most affected wipe sampling locations were isolators (24.4%), storage areas (17.6%) and laminar flow hoods (16.6%). However, areas with no direct contact to antineoplastic drugs were also frequently contaminated (8.9%).

CONCLUSION

Overall, the surface contaminations with antineoplastic drugs continue to decrease or were generally at a low level. Therefore, we adjusted guidance values according to the available data. The identification of critical sampling locations may help pharmacies to further improve cleaning procedure and reduce the risk of occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs.

Canadian monitoring program of the surface contamination with 11 antineoplastic drugs in 122 centers

INTRODUCTION

Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs can lead to long-term adverse effects on workers' health. Environmental monitoring is conducted once a year, as part of a Canadian monitoring program. The objective was to describe contamination with 11 antineoplastic drugs measured on surfaces.

METHODS

Six standardized sites in oncology pharmacy and six in outpatient clinic were sampled in each hospital. Samples were analyzed by ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (non-platinum drugs) and by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (platinum-based drugs). The limits of detection (in ng/cm²) were: 0.0006 for cyclophosphamide; 0.001 for docetaxel; 0.04 for 5-fluorouracil; 0.0004 for gemcitabine; 0.0007 for irinotecan; 0.0009 for methotrexate; 0.004 for paclitaxel, 0.009 for vinorelbine, 0.02 for doxorubicine, 0.0037 for etoposide and 0.004 for the platinum. Sub-analyses were done with a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.

RESULTS

122 Canadian hospitals participated. Cyclophosphamide (451/1412, 32% of positive samples, 90^th percentile of concentration 0.0160 ng/cm²) and gemcitabine (320/1412, 23%, 0.0036 ng/cm²) were most frequently measured on surfaces. The surfaces most frequently contaminated with at least one drug were the front grille inside the biological safety cabinet (97/121, 80%) and the armrest of patient treatment chair (92/118, 78%).The distribution of cyclophosphamide concentration was higher for centers that prepared ≥ 5000 antineoplastic drug preparations/year (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This monitoring program allowed centers to benchmark their contamination with pragmatic contamination thresholds derived from the Canadian 90^th percentiles. Problematic areas need corrective measures such as decontamination. The program helps to increase the workers' awareness.

Reducing the particles generated by flushing institutional toilets

Airborne particles play a significant role in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. A previous study reported that institutional flush-O-meter (FOM) toilets can generate 3-12 times as many droplets as other toilets by splashing (large droplets) and bubble bursting (fine droplets). In this study, an aerosol suppression lid was evaluated to measure the reduction of particles by size using three metrics; number, surface area, and mass concentrations. To quantify toilet flush aerosol over time, detailed particle size distributions (from 0.016-19.81 µm across 152 size bins) were measured from a FOM toilet in a controlled-environment test chamber, without ventilation, with and without use of the suppression lid. Prior to each flushing trial, the toilet bowl water was seeded with 480 mL fluorescein at 10 mg/mL. A high-speed camera was used to record the large droplet movements after flushing. An ultraviolet-visible spectrophotometer was used to analyze the wipe samples to evaluate the contamination on the lid. The particle number, surface area, and mass concentrations without a lid were elevated compared to a lid in the first 90 sec. Overall, the lid reduced 48% of total number concentration, 76% of total surface area concentration, and 66% of total mass concentration, respectively. Depending on the particle size, the number concentration reduction percentage ranged from 48-100% for particles larger than 0.1 µm. Large droplets created by splashing were captured by the high-speed camera. Similar studies can be used for future particle aerodynamic studies. The fluorescein droplets deposited on the lid back sections, which were closer to the FOM accounted for 82% of the total fluorescein. Based on two-way ANOVA analysis, there were significant differences among both the experimental flushes (p = 0.0185) and the sections on the lid (p = 0.0146). Future work should explore the aerosolization produced by flushing and the performance of the lid in real restroom environments, where feces and urine exist in the bowl water and the indoor ventilation system is in operation.

A simple approach to assess the cancer risk of occupational exposure to genotoxic drugs in healthcare settings

Background

Several drugs for human use possess genotoxic properties as a necessary consequence of their intended therapeutic effect (e.g. antineoplastics). Health workers may be exposed to these chemicals in various occupational settings such as dose preparation and administration. To date, there are no quantitative risk assessment models to estimate the cancer risk of health workers due to the handling of genotoxic drugs. We therefore developed a quantitative risk assessment model to assess the cancer risk of occupational exposure to genotoxic drugs in healthcare settings based on the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) concept. This model was used to evaluate the cancer risk of health workers due to the handling of genotoxic drugs in modern health care facilities.

Methods

We modified the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) concept to fit the purpose of occupational cancer risk assessment. The risk model underlying ICH guideline M7 (R1): “assessment and control of DNA reactive (mutagenic) impurities in pharmaceuticals to limit potential carcinogenic risk” was used as a starting point for our model. We conducted a short review of studies on the occupational exposure of health workers to genotoxic drugs. These occupational exposure data were compared to the acceptable exposure levels resulting from our TTC based risk model.

Results

Based on the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) concept, we defined an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 4 μg/day as threshold of no concern for the exposure of health workers to genotoxic drugs. Regarding the dermal exposure of health workers to genotoxic drugs, we derived a corresponding acceptable surface contamination level (ASCL) of 20 ng/cm². Both ADI and ASCL are usually not exceeded in modern healthcare settings. Current safety precautions provide sufficient protection to health workers.

Conclusions

The application of our model indicates that workers in modern healthcare facilities are not at risk of developing work related cancer above widely accepted cancer risk levels due to the occupational exposure to genotoxic drugs. Hence, the present study may assist employers and public authorities to make informed decisions concerning the need for (further) protective measures and during risk communication to health workers.

Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs: what about hospital sanitation personnel?

OBJECTIVE

Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs (ANPs) occurs mainly through dermal contact. Our study was set up to assess the potential exposure of hospital sanitation (HS) personnel, for whom almost no data are available, through contamination of surfaces they regularly touch.

METHODS

In the oncology departments of two hospitals around Montreal, surface wipe samples of 120-2000 cm² were taken at 10 sites cleaned by the HS personnel and five other sites frequently touched by nursing and pharmacy personnel. A few hand wipe samples were collected to explore skin contamination. Wipes were analyzed by ultra-performance liquid chromatography tandem-mass spectrometry for 10 ANPs.

RESULTS

Overall, 60.9% of 212 surface samples presented at least one ANP above the limits of detection (LOD). Cyclophosphamide and gemcitabine were most often detected (52% and 31% of samples respectively), followed by 5-fluorouracil and irinotecan (15% each). Highest concentrations of five ANPs were found in outpatient clinics on toilet floors (5-fluorouracil, 49 ng/cm²; irinotecan, 3.6 ng/cm²), a perfusion pump (cyclophosphamide, 19.6 ng/cm²) and on a cytotoxic waste bin cover (gemcitabine, 4.97 ng/cm²). Floors in patient rooms had highest levels of cytarabine (0.12 ng/cm²) and methotrexate (6.38 ng/cm²). Hand wipes were positive for two of 12 samples taken on HS personnel, seven of 18 samples on nurses, and two of 14 samples on pharmacy personnel.

CONCLUSIONS

A notable proportion of surfaces showed measurable levels of ANPs, with highest concentrations found on surfaces cleaned by HS personnel, who would benefit from appropriate preventive training. As potential sources of worker exposure, several hospital surfaces need to be regularly monitored to evaluate environmental contamination and efficacy of cleaning.

Assessment of occupational exposure to nebulized isopropyl alcohol as disinfectant during aseptic compounding of parenteral cytotoxic drugs in cleanrooms

Pharmacy technicians are exposed to volatile organic compounds, like the disinfectant isopropyl alcohol (IPA), during the process of aseptic compounding of parenteral cytotoxic drugs. The occupational exposure to nebulized IPA during aseptic compounding has not been investigated. The aim of this study was to investigate the exposure to IPA during aseptic compounding of parenteral cytotoxic drugs and to assess compliance with legal and regulatory limits. As a secondary endpoint, the difference between two disinfection methods was compared regarding the exposure to IPA. The exposure to IPA was measured during five working shifts of 8 hr and one shift of 4 hr. The concentration IPA was measured by using a six-gas monitor. Total daily exposure was calculated as 8-hr Time Weighted Average (TWA) air concentration in mg/m³ and compared with an Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) value of 500 mg/m³ and incidental peak exposure of 5,000 mg/m³. To assess whether the 8-hr TWA air concentration meets the legal and regulatory limits the Similar Exposure Groups (SEG) compliance test was used. A paired sample t-test was conducted to assess difference in exposure between two disinfection methods. The average 8-hr TWA exposure to IPA during the six measurements varied from 2.6 mg/m³ to 43.9 mg/m³ and the highest momentary concentration measured was 860 mg/m³. The result of the SEG compliance test was 3.392 (U_r value) and was greater than the U_t value of 2.187 which means the exposure to IPA is in compliance with the OEL value. No significant difference in exposure was shown between two disinfection methods (p = 0.49). In conclusion, exposure to IPA during aseptic compounding of parenteral cytotoxic drugs showed compliance to the OEL values with no significant difference in exposure between two disinfection methods.

Blood contamination of the pharmaceutical staff by irinotecan and its two major metabolites inside and outside a compounding unit

BACKGROUND

Caregivers in healthcare settings are exposed to a risk of antineoplastic drug contamination which can lead to adverse health effects. Biological monitoring is necessary to estimate the actual level of exposure of these workers. This study was conducted with the aim of assessing blood contamination levels by irinotecan and its metabolites of pharmaceutical staff operating inside and outside a compounding unit.

METHODS

The study took place within the pharmaceutical unit of a French comprehensive cancer centre. Blood samples were collected from the pharmacy workers operating inside and outside the compounding unit, and analysed by UHPLC-MS/MS. Plasma and red blood cell irinotecan and its metabolites (SN-38; APC) were determined with a validated analytical method detection test.

RESULTS

A total of 17/78 (21.8%) plasma and red blood cell-based assays were found to be contaminated among staff. Overall, the total number of positive assays was significantly higher for staff members working outside the compounding unit than for workers working inside it (P = 0.022), with respectively 5/42 (11.9%) and 12/36 (33.3%) positive assays. For plasma dosages, the "outside" group had a significantly higher number of positive assays (P = 0.014). For red blood cell-based assays, no significant difference was found (P = 0.309).

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals that pharmaceutical staff serving in health care settings are exposed to a risk of antineoplastic drug contamination, not only inside the compounding room but also in adjacent rooms. The results would help to raise awareness and potentially establish protective measures for caregivers working in areas close to the compounding room as well.

Surface contamination with nine antineoplastic drugs in 109 canadian centers; 10 years of a monitoring program

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare workers exposure to antineoplastic drugs can lead to adverse health effects. Guidelines promote the safe handling of antineoplastic drugs, but no safe exposure limit was determined. Regular surface sampling contributes to ensuring workers safety.

METHODS

A cross-sectional monitoring is conducted once a year with voluntary Canadian centers, since 2010. Twelve standardized sampling sites were sampled. Samples were analyzed by high performance mass coupled liquid chromatography. The limits of detection (in ng/cm²) were: 0.001 for cyclophosphamide and gemcitabine; 0.3 for docetaxel and ifosfamide; 0.04 for 5-fluorouracil and paclitaxel; 0.003 for irinotecan; 0.002 for methotrexate; 0.01 for vinorelbine.

RESULTS

The surfaces from 109 centers were sampled between 01/01/2020-18/06/2020. Twenty-six centers delayed their participation because of the COVID-19 pandemic. 1217 samples were analyzed. Surfaces were frequently contaminated with cyclophosphamide (34% positive, 75th percentile 0.00165 ng/cm²) and gemcitabine (16% and <0.001 ng/cm²). The armrest of patient treatment chairs (84% to at least one drug), the front grille inside the biological safety cabinet (BSC) (73%) and the floor in front of the BSC (55%) were frequently contaminated. Centers that prepared ≥5000 antineoplastic drugs annually had higher concentration of cyclophosphamide on their surfaces (p < 0.0001). Contamination measured on the surfaces was reduced from 2010 to 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

This large-scale study showed reproducible long term follow up of the contamination of standardized sites of Canadian centers and a reduction in surface contamination from 2010 to 2020. Periodic surface sampling help centers meet their continuous improvements goals to reduce exposure as much as possible. The COVID-19 pandemic had a limited impact on the program.