Assessment of the quality of sample labelling for clinical research

Objective: To assess the quality of the labels for clinical trial samples through current regulations, and to analyze its potential correlation with the specific characteristics of each sample. Method: A transversal multicenter study where the clinical trial samples from two third level hospitals were analyzed. The eleven items from Directive 2003/94/EC, as well as the name of the clinical trial and the dose on the label cover, were considered variables for labelling quality. The influence of the characteristics of each sample on labelling quality was also analyzed. Outcome: The study included 503 samples from 220 clinical trials. The mean quality of labelling, understood as the proportion of items from Appendix 13, was of 91.9%. Out of these, 6.6% did not include the name of the sample in the outer face of the label, while in 9.7% the dose was missing. The samples with clinical trial-type samples presented a higher quality (p < 0.049), blinding reduced their quality (p = 0.017), and identification by kit number or by patient increased it (p < 0.01). The promoter was the variable which introduced the highest variability into the analysis. Conclusions: The mean quality of labelling is adequate in the majority of clinical trial samples. The lack of essential information in some samples, such as the clinical trial code and the period of validity, is alarming and might be the potential source for dispensing or administration errors.

Study on adherence to treatment with imatinib in chronic myeloid leukaemia and its association with therapeutic response

Objective: To assess the level of adherence to treatment with imatinib in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia and its association with therapeutic response. Materials and methods: Study conducted on October, 2013 - March, 2014, including patients diagnosed with Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia on treatment with imatinib in the hospital. Therapeutic adherence was assessed through the standard Morisky-Green Questionnaire and the medication dispensing record. Those patients who did not complete 6 months of treatment and/or did not complete the questionnaire were excluded. Therapeutic response was assessed following clinical guidelines. The descriptive analysis of variables and correlation was conducted through Pearsons's Chi-Square Test. Results: The study included 31 patients. When assessing the level of association between response variables and therapeutic adherence: 1. The highest molecular response was reached by 68.4% of those patients with high adherence, and by 75% of those patients with intermediate adherence. 2. Complete molecular response was achieved by 57.9% of patients with high adherence, and by 58.3% of patients with intermediate adherence. No statistically significant differences were found in response variables between patients with high and intermediate therapeutic adherence. No association was observed between level of adherence and therapeutic response. Conclusions: We cannot confirm that a different level of therapeutic adherence might have an impact on response to imatinib, though this should be taken into account in cases of therapeutic failure or sub-optimal response.