CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF AVAILABLE DRUG INFORMATION RESOURCES REGARDING DRUG-DRUG INTERACTIONS: AN AUDIT FROM A TERTIARY CARE CANCER CENTRE IN INDIA
Author(s)
Shreya Chandrakant More, PharmD1, Dr Tanuj Chawla, MD1, Dr. Amit Joshi2.
1Clinical Pharmacology, Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Tata Memorial Centre (TMC), Navi Mumbai, India, 2Tata Memorial Hospital, India.
1Clinical Pharmacology, Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Tata Memorial Centre (TMC), Navi Mumbai, India, 2Tata Memorial Hospital, India.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical relevance of five drug interaction (DI) resources regarding Drug-Drug interaction (DDI) and to develop methods to mitigate the differences in managing DDIs.
METHODS: A prescription audit was conducted between 15th Aug 2025 to 31st Oct 2025 using five Drug Information (DI) resources, i.e. Micromedex®, UpToDate®, DrugBank Interaction Checker (DBIC), Drugs.com Drug Interaction Checker (DDIC) and Medscape.com Drug Interaction Checker (MDIC). A Scope score was given by calculating the percentage of interactions captured by them. A higher Scope score reflects broader coverage of the DDIs. Each DI resource was also given a Completeness score describing severity, clinical information, mechanisms, and DDI management. The higher score indicated detailed and clinically useful information. We then derived our own recommendations based on the audit and literature search.
RESULTS: Data of 80 patients were captured, i.e. 30 chemotherapy and 50 were combined chemo-nonchemotherapy medicines. We identified 185 DDIs, in which 16 were Anticancer-Anticancer, 55 were Anticancer-Non Anticancer, and 114 were Non Anticancer-Non Anticancer drug combinations. DBIC had the highest Scope score of 57%, followed by UpToDate (46%),while MDIC showed the lowest score i.e. 31%. DBIC clocked the highest completeness score of 99.7%, closely followed by UpToDate (98%), while DDIC fared poorly at 86%.
According to our literature search, 34% (63/185) of DDIs were not clinically significant. DDIs were categorized into major, moderate, or minor, as per their severity, as mentioned in the DI resources. Cumulatively, 25% (27/108), 39% (57/147) and 39% (9/23) of major, moderate and minor interactions were clinically not significant, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: DI resources for DDIs are unreliable, especially in oncology settings. We formulated our own hospital-specific guide to manage the DDIs, and we recommend the same for everyone.
Keywords: Drug-Drug interaction, Oncology, Drug information resources, Discrepancies, Disparities.
METHODS: A prescription audit was conducted between 15th Aug 2025 to 31st Oct 2025 using five Drug Information (DI) resources, i.e. Micromedex®, UpToDate®, DrugBank Interaction Checker (DBIC), Drugs.com Drug Interaction Checker (DDIC) and Medscape.com Drug Interaction Checker (MDIC). A Scope score was given by calculating the percentage of interactions captured by them. A higher Scope score reflects broader coverage of the DDIs. Each DI resource was also given a Completeness score describing severity, clinical information, mechanisms, and DDI management. The higher score indicated detailed and clinically useful information. We then derived our own recommendations based on the audit and literature search.
RESULTS: Data of 80 patients were captured, i.e. 30 chemotherapy and 50 were combined chemo-nonchemotherapy medicines. We identified 185 DDIs, in which 16 were Anticancer-Anticancer, 55 were Anticancer-Non Anticancer, and 114 were Non Anticancer-Non Anticancer drug combinations. DBIC had the highest Scope score of 57%, followed by UpToDate (46%),while MDIC showed the lowest score i.e. 31%. DBIC clocked the highest completeness score of 99.7%, closely followed by UpToDate (98%), while DDIC fared poorly at 86%.
According to our literature search, 34% (63/185) of DDIs were not clinically significant. DDIs were categorized into major, moderate, or minor, as per their severity, as mentioned in the DI resources. Cumulatively, 25% (27/108), 39% (57/147) and 39% (9/23) of major, moderate and minor interactions were clinically not significant, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: DI resources for DDIs are unreliable, especially in oncology settings. We formulated our own hospital-specific guide to manage the DDIs, and we recommend the same for everyone.
Keywords: Drug-Drug interaction, Oncology, Drug information resources, Discrepancies, Disparities.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
HPR72
Topic
Clinical Outcomes, Health Policy & Regulatory, Real World Data & Information Systems
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas, Oncology